￼“We have finally found something that doesn’t have a cause, because
there was no time for a cause to exist in. For me this means that there
is no possibility of a creator, because there is no time for a creator to
have existed in.” ~Steven Hawking
I read a science news article the other day wherein the late astrophysicist, Stephen Hawking, was giving some finalized theories regarding our universe and a creator in his farewell book, “Brief Answers to Big Questions,”. I used to just automatically equate Hawking with the same level of genius as Einstein because folks said he was, so I was supposed to as well; but I dropped that potato real fast when one of his last opines smashed head on into an asteroid at 186,000 miles per second.
In his last days, one of the final issues he addressed was the existence of God. He stated in reference to our universe’s beginning, “We have finally found something that doesn’t have a cause, because there was no time for a cause to exist in. For me this means that there is no possibility of a creator, because there is no time for a creator to have existed in.”
You don’t have to believe in God to perceive that there is something really wonky with that simplified conclusion. Even Einstein held to a pantheistic concept of an impersonal Creative entity. Hawking is stating with all confidence, that God cannot exist because before the Big Bang there was no linear time in which anything could be the cause of anything, therefore, neither could there be an ultimate conciseness to choose to cause something. Zing! What the hey kind of brilliance was that? He certainly wasn’t thinking through all the possibilities when he blurted that one over his synthesizer.
He addressed the God issue with a near idiotic assumption that the universe and specifically linear time had to have God within its boundaries, or perhaps more to the point, a time out of time, in order to exist, rather than a God from a timeless higher dimension outside the creation event, or the sudden explosion of everything from nothing, referred to as the Big Bang.
Why that’s like saying, “I just made you pancakes for breakfast, but unfortunately I didn’t exist because I wasn’t part of the pancakes, so there aren’t any pancakes. So why don’t you go back to bed, and then come back out here after awhile, and see if any pancakes show up. You never know, I might suddenly exist inside the Bisquick box, and then, there they’ll be… all nice and fluffy with butter and syrup on them!”
The whole concept there StephenO, is that an extremely powerful Entity chooses to create a dimension of both physical matter and continuously expanding movement of said matter, including those speedy little photons which is what we like to measure the speed thereof and refer to the results as time. The Entity itself is not a part of Its newly created dimension, any more than you are a part of your scooter, which will probably be enshrined in a prominent place at The Cambridge University now.
Time is an intrinsic prisoner of our expanding universe and is not a requirement nor probability outside of it, regardless of what alternate realities lie beyond its expanse. I cannot help but chortle a bit at Hawking’s final conclusion on the subject, because the one thing he was right on, is that God really cannot be a part of time, which is merely an attribute of the physical universe He made to begin with, so what was he putting in his tea everyday pray tell, that would give him cause to believe that a creator necessarily has to have this attribute of His creation in order to exist, when he made such an utterance?
As a young man he was known to have believed in a creator, but perhaps one reason for the eventual overtly atheistic view, could be that he became set against a perceived mean God for a lifetime of imprisonment in a non-responsive body, which would be understandable; however that angle is purely speculation on my part. Actually, that’s not true. My wife suggested it to me.
At any rate, I would have thought that he would have been more of an outside the box, thinking bigger kind of guy, but I guess his logic got sucked into a black hole in the end. Well, that was kind of a dismal end theory to wrap up with, and I believe I’ll adhere to a much grander and more creative hypothesis myself.
Douglas L. Duncan